Partly, yes. Partly it's a coping mechanism for being homeless, because they have no money and useful social connections, or the know-how to get out of it. In other words drugs being a symptom of homelessness, not necessarily a cause.
Regardless of the extent of drugs' blame, I'm skeptical of any solution to homelessness that entails just putting them in a cubicle, "no strings", and declaring them no longer homeless. Yes it can be a useful mechanism, but there's more work to do beyond that, it's admission that there's more to fighting homelessness than shoving people in free apartments.
I'm more curious as to why there's not an equivalent grassroots leftist sentiment for getting them jobs, as though that were somehow undignified. But notwithstanding the sometimes distorted incentives, maybe that's the actual hard part - holding down a job, and getting one that pays enough to make rent. Jobs can give us a sense of meaning, but if validation and social needs are being replaced by a similar proxy among the homeless, then maybe motivation is stifled - on top of the general fatigue that comes from it.
So your argument here is that someone didn't have the money for housing and the coping mechanism the non-drug addict chose is to start doing drugs?
Typed out that way, does that still make sense in your head?
This is not your typical chick-and-egg type problem. Those who are not addicted to something tend to be off the street relatively quickly. It's those with pre-existing problems that don't, such as drugs, mental instability, etc.
The over-representation of certain demographics amongst the homeless tells you full-stop this is true, such as war veterans.
> Mental instability is self-medicated with drugs.
I'm guessing you've never seen directly or by proxy what happens when someone ends up in jail because they attacked a family member with a knife as a result of them going off their meds.
I didn't say mental illness, I said mental instability.
People with those sorts of mental instabilities find they have NO support structure because they're fundamentally unsafe to everyone but state actors.
It gets even worse for you when you start to realize the how many people aren't even counted because they're homeless for mere days due to being kicked out, unexpected circumstances, etc.
What you're thinking of are what's known as "chronically homeless" and your challenge is showing both that drug users are a significant portion of those who are homeless for under 100 days and that those who are not drug users are a significant portion of the chronically homeless.
> I'm skeptical of any solution to homelessness that entails just putting them in a cubicle, "no strings", and declaring them no longer homeless. Yes it can be a useful mechanism, but there's more work to do beyond that,
For many people, there is, and they're capable of doing that work themselves once they're relieved from other pressures (like day-to-day survival). We all probably know someone that isn't enough for, but why not start with the lowest-cost interventions?
> maybe that's the actual hard part - holding down a job, and getting one that pays enough to make rent.
That's a hard thing for anyone – though within most people's ability. (Ignoring, for the moment, the question of whether people should be obliged to in order to continue living.) Having a place to live makes both getting and holding a job much easier.
My understanding is that where “housing first” has been tried, it makes it very much easier to start dealing with the other issues around mental health and getting jobs.
Housing without drug addiction or mental house services doesn’t end well for the housing, which is why housing costs are around $10k/month/person in many of these programs (at least in the Seattle area). You have to put asides funds for services and rehabbing the housing every year.
In addition, my pet theory is that if society _really_ wanted to help poor black communities (as an example) they would start, not by throwing money at the school, but by throwing money at the _community_ around the school. "throwing money" is a short-hand here, but working to provide services so the _parents_ aren't stressed and are a part of the school success.
edit: i'm serious. do you guys know any drug addicts? you lose your ability to make a plan.